Joe Mauer...HOF yay, or nay?

[Airdrop01]

That’s awesome. Nice one.

I should post “should Brian McCann” be on the HOF. Or Darrell Porter.. Or Jason Kendall. Or Benito Santiago. At least Porter, Kendall and Santiago were actually catchers.

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by dsvitak

Mauer's adjusted OPS is the same as J. D. Drews. Mauer's dWar is about 2...for his CAREER. He sucked as a catcher, which is why he hasn't been a catcher for years.

Ummm....no.

Correct, and Drew isn't a Hall of Famer, but one of these guys played right field with that bat, the other played catcher.

Oh, and that catcher has that same OPS+ with 1500 more PA, and is still playing.

That's a horrible comparison to try to make.

That's like saying Ozzie Smith can't be a Hall of Famer because his OPS+ is worse than Charlie Grimm.

Not exactly playing the same positions, and that matters.

[Airdrop01]

Mauer. Is. Not. A. Catcher.

Again, there’s a big difference between catching and other positions. It’s why Ferrell is in the HOF. A point which was summarily ignored by the people here because it doesn’t fit the template about statistics of WAR, JAWS, JUGS or whatever the heck because those people don’t understand the importance of a catcher to his team ....especially one who plays everyday, all year in the position of CATCHER.

[Jeffy25]

Btw, I've had this discussion elsewhere before.

I broke it down into two careers for Mauer

First, as a catcher

He really stopped catching on a regular basis after 2013.

At that point - .323/.405/.468 - 135 OPS+ - 5060 PA - 105 HR - 1414 base hits - 44.7 rWAR - considered fairly neutral defensively at that point.

That's short, but Air just said Campy deserves in over him on those rankings, let's compare the two
Campy - .276/.360/.500 - 123 OPS+ - 4815 PA - 242 HR - 1161 base hits - 34.1 rWAR

Campy had more power, but that's very literally it. And he wouldn't have won those 51 and 55 MVP Awards today, with 53 being a decent debate.

Mauer was better at getting on base, ripping singles at high regularity. Defensively it's hard to measure the two or compare them at all. It's also a very different game in both eras. But if we want to compare them to the rest of their eras, both were the best catchers of their time (Posey/Pudge/Molina and Berra/Crandall as well) and very good hitting catchers.

Catcher Mauer is a borderline Hall guy. But it's a little short. But he's be heading there. He's basically right where Posey is at the end of 2018 when he stops catching.


Then secondly, as a 1B/DH/RF - .277/.364/.387 - 107 OPS+ - 10.3 rWAR - basically a league average starter at this point.



I break it down as this. He stopped elite catching about 2-3 years too soon. But, if he can sustain and lengthen his career as a good MLB regular for a long time, then he'd jump into that compiler discussion we had in the other thread. He is still contributing above average value and still producing value for the Twins. But he needs to keep doing it for another 3-5 years probably.

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

Mauer. Is. Not. A. Catcher.

Again, there’s a big difference between catching and other positions. It’s why Ferrell is in the HOF. A point which was summarily ignored by the people here because it doesn’t fit the template about statistics of WAR, JAWS, JUGS or whatever the heck because those people don’t understand the importance of a catcher to his team ....especially one who plays everyday, all year in the position of CATCHER.

Ferrell is in because the vet committee respected him and put him in. Along with Pee Wee Reese. They went in because they were respected, not for their talent on the field, and Pee Wee had a much stronger argument.

Putting Ferrell in as akin to putting Lance Parish in.

Parish caught more innings, had a fantastic defensive reputation.

Or what about Bob Boone? Jason Kendall? Tony Pena?

Plenty of glove first catchers who had long MLB careers. Doesn't mean they should be in the Hall of Fame.


Mauer has caught the 145th most games at catcher all time.

More than Joe Torre, Dave Valle, Gene Tenace, Jose Molina, Buster Posey, etc.

He. Is. A. Catcher.

lol Just because he is extending his career as a hitter doesn't take away from him being a catcher.

Or do you have to be catching full time at 38 for you to consider someone a Hall of Fame catcher? Oh wait....Campy.....


Btw, as a Cards fan....I watch Yadi every year. We know the value of a great catcher. You are just completely off base with your assertions.

You can value defense at catcher, and even give it a greater value than others. That's fine. But you are doing it to parade and pillage a fight against advanced metrics because you don't understand them.

Figure out what you are so upset about, and go from there.

[Airdrop01]

Mauer hasn’t caught an inning since 2013 I would wager. I don’t know. I haven’t looked it up. I’d be shocked if he’s caught ten games since then.

Joe Maurer isn’t close to the player Campy was... but that’s not what the metrics say, so you’ll never be convinced. You can’t compare one era to another with metrics. I mean, even the most ardent sabremetrics person should agree with that. My point is that’s my opinion. Based upon what I’ve seen. I don’t need a made up stat to tell me what I’ve seen. I was young but not blind. Yes. I’m old. As has been pointed out.

My beef is that you guys, except Cobra and a couple others, seem unable to understand that the metrics you worship are totally subjective and created out of whole cloth because those who create them struggle to see the things a player does in the game itself....not just in a box score. It’s not even that they’re useless. They’re a tool. But they’re treated like the be all end all by most of baseball and it’s fans. And then citing them for why a guy should be in the HOF, especially when it’s utterly made up, to sell books, is crazy.

If he’s a DH, or a 1B, or a RF, I could live with that. But the argument is being made that he’s a HOF catcher, which means a helluva lot more matters than whatever the heck stat you want to use, or metric, etc.

So yeah, I’m old, and I believe in scouting, the eye test and distrust “stats” made up by fatty radio guys and Baseball writers who think guys like Pete Rose isn’t a HOF player and then cite me to their made up stats (which they made up to sell books...like JAWS) to support their arguments.

And you don’t know anything about Dayton Moore if you think he agrees with sabremetrics or followed it in building the 14 and 15 Royals. I know the man. The sabremetrics folks were all losing their minds when he traded Wil Myers, signed guys like Johnny Gomes, etc. Jarrod Dyson? Selfish player. Terrible metrics. But it worked because he has the athleticism for what they wanted to do. Hosmer? Terrible metrics player. OOTP is not his bag. Great baseball player though. The Royals were the anti metrics team. They made contact, were athletic, and ran like hell. Their WAR and similar metrics were terrible. Hoch, Holland, Herrera, Davis? Not metrics players. They got guys that could throw hard and threw enough of them at the wall they caught lightning in a bottle.

Know what they did this year? They tried to find market inefficiency and steal players. They used the metrics. It’s got them the worst team in baseball and it’s not close. If they had $240MM, it would work. They don’t. They have contracts tied up in non sabremetric players that got old. Partially because they had to because of injury and death. Partially because they were trying to go for one more year in 16 and that’s what they felt they had to do. Metrics got them a guy who looks good on paper, Danny Duffy, who doesn’t compete, has a soft head, and is always hurt. He’s a good dude. But metrics is how you get guys like him signed to long term deals.

[Airdrop01]

Just looked, he hasn’t caught a pitch since 2013. He caught only 425 or so innings in 11. 600 or so in 12 and 650 or so in 13. That’s not even half time in those years.

Not. A. Catcher.

Campanella averaged over 1000 innings caught a season when he was paralyzed in a car wreck. Catching that much and putting up the offense he did was great. And if you don’t think that matters, then I can’t help you. It’s not easy to catch 130 games in a year with spring, etc. it’s a big deal. Doing it and hitting is a huge deal.

[Splitter24]

I saw Jeffy25 list Brian Downing as a catcher, which is a serious stretch. I loved Brian Downing when he played (though, to be honest the morphing into the Incredible Hulk thing was a tad bit suspicious). But he played more games both at DH and LF than he did at catcher. Also, he only had the one real good year at catcher in '79. Otherwise, all of his real value as a player came in the 80's when he wasn't catching anymore.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by mirrf

2000 hits and a .300 average for primarily a catcher, I would lean yes. He's in the top 15 catchers of all time, arguably in the top 10.

He's comparable to Buster Posey. Sure, Posey is better, but they are in the same ballpark.

One can play defense and even had the offense changed because of him, the other makes Kyle Schwarber look like a Gold Glover.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

I’ve got a metric for Jay Jaffe: DORKS. Damned Old Recalcitrants Killing Sports.

I'm stealing this for awhile.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by TheMaus2

10th on the Career WAR ranking for C, 3 batting titles, 3 GGs, 6 AS, 5 SS and an MVP award on a team that doesn't have many greats that I can remember? He's getting in, but maybe in a later ballot.

Veterans committee 20 yrs from now.

[The Game]

One page has Simmons and Mauer at a score of 112. If Simmons getrs in eventually then perhaps Mauer should also. Mauer does have more awards and highr AVG, OBP, etc but lack some of the base stats like power and Hits.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Certainly, the more information the better, always.

Just know that our brains are giant fail factories, we can't possibly measure or evaluate all 2430 games each year with any objectivity, and we are riddled with biases. Plus, to even attempt to do that, you are watching it on cameras/tv with limited information (such as where were the players positioned, broadcaster influence, etc).

There is so much room for error it's rather incredible.

You're not telling me anything I don't already know. You're still not accepting the point. WAR, whether proceeded w/an r, f x,y or z, is still subject to the opinion of who is calculating it. There is no standard. It is a measurement based on the mathematician's gut. Just as a traditionalist's decision to use Triple Crown numbers comes from his gut.

Absolutely.

But even if you are coming to these debates with different inherent information, it doesn't end with WAR.


Mantle was the better hitter, but had the shorter career. Mays the better defender and much longer career.

Snider isn't in the conversation with those two.

If Air attended every single home game that Brooklyn played in 1955 for example...then he attended, at max, 6% of the games played in baseball that season. Would have seen Mays 11 times, and Mantle three times (World Series) and would be completely unqualified to discuss it at all if that is all the information being brought to the table.

Not to mention the massive bias that would exist in 1955 (Dodger fan no less), and the continued and likely extrapolated bias that would exist in 2018. Plus, holy cow the failed memory at that point.


You can discuss Mays and Mantle ad naseum, they are a fair debate with different strengths and weaknesses. Two people could have a reason for their disagreement based on information that they value more.

However, if people are just entering the debate with their minds made up and looking for relevant information to support their arguments, that's just a waste of time.

If I always used rWAR for example, and never fWAR, and then suddenly went to fWAR because it supported my argument in a particular case, you can throw me out of the conversation right there. That's just cherry picking to present an argument. It's useless.

Here, you are trying to impose rules on a fictitious "wild west" sports debate. There is no logic that is going to be used in this scenario. People are going to use whatever supports their point. It will still be a person's subjective opinion.

It's a created fact. Just like WAR is.

They are very literally the same thing in this arena.

A players rWAR won't change because someone wants to change it up or down. It's based on their output. Same as Batting Average. It's a set formula. Just because it has a sister called fWAR doesn't detract from that.

Created fact? Lol! So if I give a cashier a dollar & get a quarter back in change, if I say " I have 25% of my money returned to me" I have created a fact? It isn't just a fact? Lol! Dude! OR how about this....I get 33 answers wrong on a 100 question test, I can say the teacher's grade of 67 was their opinion, not a fact? Come on, man...........

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by Splitter24

I saw Jeffy25 list Brian Downing as a catcher, which is a serious stretch. I loved Brian Downing when he played (though, to be honest the morphing into the Incredible Hulk thing was a tad bit suspicious). But he played more games both at DH and LF than he did at catcher. Also, he only had the one real good year at catcher in '79. Otherwise, all of his real value as a player came in the 80's when he wasn't catching anymore.

Downing caught for about 2K less innings than Mauer, they are certainly in that same relm.

Both good hitters, both passable as catchers. Mauer caught more. Downing had the career length. Good hitter throughout the 80's, but yes, mostly after he was done catching.

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

Mauer hasn’t caught an inning since 2013 I would wager. I don’t know. I haven’t looked it up. I’d be shocked if he’s caught ten games since then.

Well considering he's been playing since before 2013, that hardly matters, right?

He caught more games prior to 2013, than over 150 guys who came before him.

Just because he moves off the position doesn't mean he wasn't a catcher (in terms of Hall of fame discussions).

Joe Maurer isn’t close to the player Campy was... but that’s not what the metrics say, so you’ll never be convinced.

Well I didn't see Campy play, but I know his legend is strong. But outside of a 41 homer season, and several other good offensive seasons. What made him such a special catcher? He only played 10 years, Mauer is already at 15 and not done yet.

Campy had the peak, but let's not ignore what Mauer's peak looked like.

from 06-13 - .327/.410/.473 - 139 OPS+ - 4384 PA - 40.4 rWAR

Campy didn't have an 8 year peak. He had a 5 year peak with another great year in 1955 after being dreadful in 54.

During those 5 years, he hit .296/.379/.543 - 2686 PA - 141 OPS+ - 25.8 rWAR

Campy was more valuable during his peak, but it was very short. And durability matters.

We can discuss who was better. And certainly Campy was more talented. But Mauer produced significantly more value. Being on the field is important.



Mauer was an all-star catcher for 8 straight years.
Campy had 5 years where he was a little better than an all-star catcher/MVP level catcher.

Would you rather have the slightly superior catcher for 5 years? Or the slightly inferior one for 8 years?

You can’t compare one era to another with metrics.

Of course you can.

They have base line averages, parks, and adjusted for many reasons. And they are very vetted.

I mean, even the most ardent sabremetrics person should agree with that.

Well they don't, because it's nonsense to think you can't.

My point is that’s my opinion. Based upon what I’ve seen. I don’t need a made up stat to tell me what I’ve seen. I was young but not blind. Yes. I’m old. As has been pointed out.

Age or not, and I'm not that young myself. Your memory and brain are filled with biases.

I was a young Cardinal fan rooting on Ozzie Smith. I thought his defense was amazing and second to none.

But the metrics tell me that Andrelton Simmons is probably a better defender, or at least on his level.

I'm not so driven by my own ego that I can't recognize that probability. I know my memory is flawed. I watched a hero, believed he was infallible, thought he was perfect.

But he's not. And there will be defensive shortstops that will come along and be better. Ozzie has some perks though. Mainly his longevity and base running. But I think of him as a flawless defender at short. I forgot about all the times he made a mistake, and heightened the times he made an amazing play. My memory is flawed, my bias stout. But I can recognize that the metrics show Simmons to be superior or on the same level for a reason. And I can watch him and understand why.

My beef is that you guys, except Cobra and a couple others, seem unable to understand that the metrics you worship are totally subjective and created out of whole cloth because those who create them struggle to see the things a player does in the game itself

None of that is the case, and that's not why this stuff was created. It was created because traditional box scores gave incredibly inferior information about player evaluation.

Every thing in the sport is subjective and man made. Just because a stat is old doesn't make it superior.

....not just in a box score. It’s not even that they’re useless. They’re a tool. But they’re treated like the be all end all by most of baseball and it’s fans.

Again, NOBODY is doing that.

I have yet to see anyone do that, ever, on these forums. Maybe they have and I didn't see it. But anyone who uses this information properly knows better.

And then citing them for why a guy should be in the HOF, especially when it’s utterly made up, to sell books, is crazy.

WAR is a great snapshot tool. If a player isn't even in the WAR threshold, it's kind of pointless to dive further into more information because the other stuff isn't going to measure up.

If he’s a DH, or a 1B, or a RF, I could live with that. But the argument is being made that he’s a HOF catcher, which means a helluva lot more matters than whatever the heck stat you want to use, or metric, etc.

His position doesn't matter except for when he hit as a catcher.

He's either a Hall of Fame player, or he isn't.

So yeah, I’m old, and I believe in scouting, the eye test and distrust “stats” made up by fatty radio guys and Baseball writers who think guys like Pete Rose isn’t a HOF player and then cite me to their made up stats (which they made up to sell books...like JAWS) to support their arguments.

JAWS wasn't created to sell books, but go on.

You continue to show you have no idea why this information exists.

It exists because the information that was out there was incredibly inferior and this game is very very easy to measure.

And you don’t know anything about Dayton Moore if you think he agrees with sabremetrics or followed it in building the 14 and 15 Royals.

I do know all about Dayton Moore and his love afair with guys like Jeff Francouer and Yunesky Betancourt, etc.

He literally ****ed up the perfect farm system. Got lucky on the Wil Myers move and ignore sabrmetrics.

Holland, Davis, Herrera, etc. That's the kind of bullpen teams are trying to buy right now and build through data.

Maybe Moore walked into it ass backwards, but that's a sabr move. Over using a bullpen to sneak in wins in October.

Traditional baseball would be throwing your ace out there 8 innings.

I don't think a single Royals starter pitched into the 7th inning during their WS run, except for Cueto's 9 inning WS start, where he only allowed 2 hits.

But that bullpen was completely sabrmetrics, whether he realized it or not.

It's also probably because Ned Yost knew what he was doing.

Front offices assemble the 90 win teams. The managers win the post-seasons.

I know the man. The sabremetrics folks were all losing their minds when he traded Wil Myers, signed guys like Johnny Gomes, etc. Jarrod Dyson? Selfish player. Terrible metrics. But it worked because he has the athleticism for what they wanted to do. Hosmer? Terrible metrics player. OOTP is not his bag. Great baseball player though. The Royals were the anti metrics team. They made contact, were athletic, and ran like hell. Their WAR and similar metrics were terrible. Hoch, Holland, Herrera, Davis? Not metrics players. They got guys that could throw hard and threw enough of them at the wall they caught lightning in a bottle.

You appear to have no clue what sabrmetrics are or is.

Being athletic is not 'anti-sabrmetrics' lol.


You seem to think there are these divisions of sabrmetrics vs traditional baseball in how you assemble a team. That's not the case.

Sabrmetrics is just using advanced data and analytics.

Assembling a team is a completely different discussion and is often done with that sort of data in an attempt to find efficiencies.

You seem to be trying to correlate the two.

Know what they did this year? They tried to find market inefficiency and steal players. They used the metrics. It’s got them the worst team in baseball and it’s not close.

What?

No they didn't.

They are stuck rebuilding because Moore didn't blow the team up when he needed to. They are stuck sucking because Moore didn't move guys like Cain, Moose, and Hosmer when he needed to and tried, incorrectly, to go for another shot at it.

They didn't sign any hidden market players.

Jon Jay, Michael Saunders, Ricky Nolasco, Blaine Boyer, Alcides Escobar, Trevor Oaks.

none of these guys are hidden, sabr gems. At all.

If they had $240MM, it would work.

Actually, it wouldn't. This free agent class sucked, and spending money in free agency is remarkably inefficient.

No team has ever been able to assemble a team in free agency and it work.

They don’t. They have contracts tied up in non sabremetric players that got old. Partially because they had to because of injury and death. Partially because they were trying to go for one more year in 16 and that’s what they felt they had to do. Metrics got them a guy who looks good on paper, Danny Duffy, who doesn’t compete, has a soft head, and is always hurt. He’s a good dude. But metrics is how you get guys like him signed to long term deals.

What sabrmetrics told you or anyone else that Danny Duffy was anything special?

If healthy, you are looking at 200 innings of league average pitching.

He may have had some upside when they extended him, but it was an unnecessary extension. They should have started the rebuild halfway into 2016 when they were 12 back at the deadline and all the players had 1.5 years of control left and two post-seasons to give to the acquiring team.



I'm not trying to be rude here, but you are shooting off a lot of narratives from the hip, and they are pretty much all false.

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

You're not telling me anything I don't already know. You're still not accepting the point. WAR, whether proceeded w/an r, f x,y or z, is still subject to the opinion of who is calculating it. There is no standard. It is a measurement based on the mathematician's gut. Just as a traditionalist's decision to use Triple Crown numbers comes from his gut.

r or f WAR are set data. They aren't changing based on the person calculating them. Go create a new one if you feel differently, but these formulas aren't changing.

Here, you are trying to impose rules on a fictitious "wild west" sports debate. There is no logic that is going to be used in this scenario. People are going to use whatever supports their point. It will still be a person's subjective opinion.

I'm not imposing any rules. Just be aware where people are coming from when they deliver information.

Created fact? Lol! So if I give a cashier a dollar & get a quarter back in change, if I say " I have 25% of my money returned to me" I have created a fact? It isn't just a fact? Lol! Dude! OR how about this....I get 33 answers wrong on a 100 question test, I can say the teacher's grade of 67 was their opinion, not a fact? Come on, man...........

That's a fun attempt to twist.


rWAR is a set formula. Your attempt to dismiss this by giving an extreme example which is no where close to what I was saying is downright silly and unnecessary.


rWAR's formula doesn't change. Nor does batting average, or the change you get at the supermarket.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

r or f WAR are set data. They aren't changing based on the person calculating them. Go create a new one if you feel differently, but these formulas aren't changing.



I'm not imposing any rules. Just be aware where people are coming from when they deliver information.



That's a fun attempt to twist.


rWAR is a set formula. Your attempt to dismiss this by giving an extreme example which is no where close to what I was saying is downright silly and unnecessary.


rWAR's formula doesn't change. Nor does batting average, or the change you get at the supermarket.

It is still subjective. One calculates it different from the other. If there is no standard, if there is no agreement then it is still opinion. fangraphs may have set way of calculating it, but it is their set opinion that it is the best way to figure it. Same for B-R. All it means is they aren't willing to change their opinion.

No one has changed their opinion on how to calculate BA. It is standardized. It is agreed upon. All the websites calculate that FACT the same way. It is not a creation. It is.

[Jeffy25]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

It is still subjective. One calculates it different from the other. If there is no standard, if there is no agreement then it is still opinion. fangraphs may have set way of calculating it, but it is their set opinion that it is the best way to figure it. Same for B-R. All it means is they aren't willing to change their opinion.

No one has changed their opinion on how to calculate BA. It is standardized. It is agreed upon. All the websites calculate that FACT the same way. It is not a creation. It is.

It hasn't changed because batting average was created soon after baseball became organized. If it was created today, it would have been changed to something closer to OBP or slugging or wOBA.

Batting average wouldn't exist if it was attempted to be created today, it falls into the same criteria you are describing. Today, there isn't one person creating all the stats. There are hundreds of thousands of people judging and assessing all of this.

[pilight]

Mauer was only a full time catcher (catching more than half his team's games) for six years, ending in 2010. It's disingenuous at best to act as if he spent his whole career as a catcher.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by pilight

Mauer was only a full time catcher (catching more than half his team's games) for six years, ending in 2010. It's disingenuous at best to act as if he spent his whole career as a catcher.

A.) He caught a significant amount of games during 9 seasons (arbitrarily throwing out years with 70+ starts is pretty misleading, particularly because it had to do with injury).

B.) Nobody is saying his career has been as a "full-time catcher". Everyone is fully admitting he moved off of the position...in fact WAR (the stat getting attacked) absolutely accounts for that as almost all of the WAR he accumulated was during the seasons he was catching.

What is ridiculous is calling him "not a catcher".